5 ms·

The path toward mastery: How to become an expert in a field

85 points by iuliangulea 6y ago

Knuthtruth 6y ago
It seems to me the pyramid needs to be flipped upside down. The amount of knowledge needed at mastery is much higher than at the base level when you are learning the elements. It is oversimplified to say the least. Seems like an average post that appeals to a layman who is searching the Internet for an short guided answer to mastery. I didn't buy it.reads like any other self help book or guide. Sorry. Lastly the 10000 hour thing is far deeper than that. Please read the context behind it. Overall decent for a first post on a hobby blog.
- movedx 6y ago
  > Lastly the 10000 hour thing is far deeper than that. Please read the context behind it. https://www.6seconds.org/2018/02/09/the-great-practice-myth-debunking-the-10000-hour-rule-and-what-you-actually-need-to-know-about-practice/ https://www.6seconds.org/2018/02/09/the-great-practice-myth-... - Perhaps this is can help shine some light on the author's original comments regarding the 10,000 hour rule? > It seems to me the pyramid needs to be flipped upside down. The amount of knowledge needed at mastery is much higher than at the base level when you are learning the elements. You're confusing knowledge with experience. At the top end of a career you need a lot of experience to build solutions, but that experience is built up (slowly) by understanding first the fundamentals, followed by how-to build tools and solutions, finally abstracting them behind frameworks or SaaS products. You have to understand TCP/IP before you can fit out an office with a network. You have to understand Python before you can use Django. And you have to understand Django before you can build a SaaS product. And you need experience before you can build anything good. > Overall decent for a first post on a hobby blog. I might come across as a bit condescending calling it a "hobby blog". It's sort of putting down the OP's efforts, I feel. EDIT: Apologies for being so crude in my original wording. I'm updating the comment to reflect a more professional, civil tone.
bayesian_horse 6y ago
I think the author confuses experts at performing particular tasks and experts for some field of knowledge. And then goes on to reiterate the age old wisdom that you need to practice, and especially the fundamentals, to gain expert skills. To become expert at either teaching a skill or a subject matter, or even advance the field, I think the most important activity is to find out and understand what and how they are doing and thinking. Standing on the shoulders of Giants is a good first step even if just to survey where to leap next.
vlttnv 6y ago
Great post! Something I have found very valuable for myself is accumulating experience. Having gone through a process, task or problem even once brings a lot of knowledge and insights. If I had to put it in numbers, I'd say mastery as a whole is 50% knowledge about the layers on one side of the pyramid and 50% experience, at least for me.
- riyaktm 6y ago
  Agree
drewcoo 6y ago
That seems to misunderstand the path from apprentice to journeyman (singular) to master. Look to actual (not software) engineers for that. They still do it and they somehow managed it even with present day educational standards. There is also a deep misunderstanding of what the Internet is. It's not a "third dimension" or a set of marketing hype. It is an engineering marvel. Which again drives home that the author has no grounding in engineering. This "pyramid of mastery" is roughly as sensible as organizing your bookshelf by color. It might please the eye of a layman, but makes no sense to the knowledgeable. There is no sense of sweep and scope of concepts and instead everything is labelled by size of something a novice can easily identify. Never mind that this shape would be an inverted pyramid given the current taxonomy and concept of size, it just doesn't make sense as a path toward mastery. Then there is cyclic learning, not drawn because apparently it would spoil the oversimplified diagrams. I don't understand this piece. It's not trying to sell me anything. If it were, it would be better designed to a purpose. For charity's sake, I'll choose to believe it's an apprentice's draft, a first effort at prose.
- qqj 6y ago
  It's larping.
- jimmaswell 6y ago
  > actual (not software) engineers Why do people (many software engineers) insist on putting down software engineering like this? I see things like "bad" languages being popular and instances like leftpad cited, as if other disciplines never have clunky standards or silly incidents.
  - something2 6y ago
    As a software engineer with an electrical engineering degree , I think there are other factors that make software engineering "less" engineering-y. One of the biggest things that comes to mind for me is that in software engineering a junior engineer can legally build, deploy, and launch a critical project. In other engineerings, projects require sign-off from a licensed (P.Eng in Canada) engineer. And the engineer that signs off on that project is the one held liable for its success or failure. Personally, I've loved software engineering for the above as it's let me grow my career much more easily, but I do think of it as a stark difference in engineering and "software engineering".
talonx 6y ago
>>There is a widespread belief that putting in 10,000 hours will make you an expert, but that myth has been proved wrong many times). No, that is a misinterpretation of what deliberate practice involves. Most shallow interpretations like this one just talk about the time involved, and not about the other important factors like continuous feedback and focused practice, and then call it a myth.
- bayesian_horse 6y ago
  I'd say the 10000 hour thing is an oversimplification. There is no clear-cut definition for either "expert" or "deliberate" practice, so those statements can never be proven or disproven. To me it is inevitable that some people embark on a journey of mastery only to discover that there is some kind of barrier that they can't overcome just by thinking or working their way out of it. Plenty of clear-cut examples, lot's of more murky ones. Some barriers are predictable, some aren't. And mastery doesn't even equal success. Many master painters had no success in their life time. Many successful artists have questionably mastery.
keyle 6y ago
The medieval explanation was far more revealing than the pyramid that came after. I highly recommend "everydays" as a way to mastery. I've done in arts and music and I'm still mind blown at how fast and proficient I got. The rules are simple: do one thing every day, that you can be held accountable (aka. in public). Such as a daily jam on twitch or soundcloud, a piece on IG. Keep it up, after 2-3 days you get much faster, after 10 days you do it flyingly, after 30 days I find the curve flattens a bit as you're pretty much as proficient as could be. Time to then start another goal as "everyday". If you miss one day, don't sweat it. Pretend that day didn't happen.
- tajd 6y ago
  I really like that idea. I use it a lot in my own work. For example, working through the sample sheets for an MIT opencourseware or working on learning a Data Science problem. Focus on how you construct your habits to learn more.
  - keyle 6y ago
    yeah and because you "ship" something everyday, your pipeline gets put in place. You'll have no blockers, you can then spend more time on better results, the pipeline is ready to go for the shipping part, whatever that may be. Some of my everyday pieces got so good they started rivalling with my quality work I spent days on.
- dgb23 6y ago
  I agree with your first sentiment especially. I’m fascinated by the master apprentice relationship in craftsmanship and other things like meditation practice (zen). It is a really powerful and - excuse this wishy washy term - natural principle. But I think it is not as prevalent as it should be when it comes to programming and software development, which is a beautiful mix of problem solving, craft/skill, and the arts of communication and organization. It is driven by experience/practice and pragmatism but also creativity and synthesis. This paradox yearns for mentorship. Gladly we have some excellent thinkers and communicators in our culture and history. And the internet. But I feel as an industry we don’t do as much as we should to further our craftsmanship.
idoby 6y ago
There's a certain truth to be considered that there are some things you will never be able to master, not even after 20000 hours. Usually people identify these things early on in life, but sometimes it takes a while. For example, I realized early on that I would never be able to become a fighter pilot.
- dsabanin 6y ago
  I found myself actually being able to do things I thought early on I could never become good at, and pretty well. If anything, now I treat that unpleasant feeling of perceived impossibility of something as a strong indication that I should pursue it. It never let me down. I think pretty much the only thing that disqualifies you from becoming a fighter jet pilot is an untreatable bodily impediment. Well, also pacifism, but that’s chosen :)
  - idoby 6y ago
    It might become treatable soon, but I'll be too old anyway. Good thing being a pilot was never a dream of mine :)

85 points by iuliangulea 6y ago

It seems to me the pyramid needs to be flipped upside down. The amount of knowledge needed at mastery is much higher than at the base level when you are learning the elements. It is oversimplified to say the least. Seems like an average post that appeals to a layman who is searching the Internet for an short guided answer to mastery. I didn't buy it.reads like any other self help book or guide. Sorry. Lastly the 10000 hour thing is far deeper than that. Please read the context behind it. Overall decent for a first post on a hobby blog.

movedx 6y ago
> Lastly the 10000 hour thing is far deeper than that. Please read the context behind it. https://www.6seconds.org/2018/02/09/the-great-practice-myth-debunking-the-10000-hour-rule-and-what-you-actually-need-to-know-about-practice/ https://www.6seconds.org/2018/02/09/the-great-practice-myth-... - Perhaps this is can help shine some light on the author's original comments regarding the 10,000 hour rule? > It seems to me the pyramid needs to be flipped upside down. The amount of knowledge needed at mastery is much higher than at the base level when you are learning the elements. You're confusing knowledge with experience. At the top end of a career you need a lot of experience to build solutions, but that experience is built up (slowly) by understanding first the fundamentals, followed by how-to build tools and solutions, finally abstracting them behind frameworks or SaaS products. You have to understand TCP/IP before you can fit out an office with a network. You have to understand Python before you can use Django. And you have to understand Django before you can build a SaaS product. And you need experience before you can build anything good. > Overall decent for a first post on a hobby blog. I might come across as a bit condescending calling it a "hobby blog". It's sort of putting down the OP's efforts, I feel. EDIT: Apologies for being so crude in my original wording. I'm updating the comment to reflect a more professional, civil tone.

bayesian_horse 6y ago

I think the author confuses experts at performing particular tasks and experts for some field of knowledge. And then goes on to reiterate the age old wisdom that you need to practice, and especially the fundamentals, to gain expert skills. To become expert at either teaching a skill or a subject matter, or even advance the field, I think the most important activity is to find out and understand what and how they are doing and thinking. Standing on the shoulders of Giants is a good first step even if just to survey where to leap next.

vlttnv 6y ago

Great post! Something I have found very valuable for myself is accumulating experience. Having gone through a process, task or problem even once brings a lot of knowledge and insights. If I had to put it in numbers, I'd say mastery as a whole is 50% knowledge about the layers on one side of the pyramid and 50% experience, at least for me.

riyaktm 6y ago
Agree

drewcoo 6y ago

That seems to misunderstand the path from apprentice to journeyman (singular) to master. Look to actual (not software) engineers for that. They still do it and they somehow managed it even with present day educational standards. There is also a deep misunderstanding of what the Internet is. It's not a "third dimension" or a set of marketing hype. It is an engineering marvel. Which again drives home that the author has no grounding in engineering. This "pyramid of mastery" is roughly as sensible as organizing your bookshelf by color. It might please the eye of a layman, but makes no sense to the knowledgeable. There is no sense of sweep and scope of concepts and instead everything is labelled by size of something a novice can easily identify. Never mind that this shape would be an inverted pyramid given the current taxonomy and concept of size, it just doesn't make sense as a path toward mastery. Then there is cyclic learning, not drawn because apparently it would spoil the oversimplified diagrams. I don't understand this piece. It's not trying to sell me anything. If it were, it would be better designed to a purpose. For charity's sake, I'll choose to believe it's an apprentice's draft, a first effort at prose.

qqj 6y ago
It's larping.
jimmaswell 6y ago
> actual (not software) engineers Why do people (many software engineers) insist on putting down software engineering like this? I see things like "bad" languages being popular and instances like leftpad cited, as if other disciplines never have clunky standards or silly incidents.
- something2 6y ago
  As a software engineer with an electrical engineering degree , I think there are other factors that make software engineering "less" engineering-y. One of the biggest things that comes to mind for me is that in software engineering a junior engineer can legally build, deploy, and launch a critical project. In other engineerings, projects require sign-off from a licensed (P.Eng in Canada) engineer. And the engineer that signs off on that project is the one held liable for its success or failure. Personally, I've loved software engineering for the above as it's let me grow my career much more easily, but I do think of it as a stark difference in engineering and "software engineering".

talonx 6y ago

>>There is a widespread belief that putting in 10,000 hours will make you an expert, but that myth has been proved wrong many times). No, that is a misinterpretation of what deliberate practice involves. Most shallow interpretations like this one just talk about the time involved, and not about the other important factors like continuous feedback and focused practice, and then call it a myth.

bayesian_horse 6y ago
I'd say the 10000 hour thing is an oversimplification. There is no clear-cut definition for either "expert" or "deliberate" practice, so those statements can never be proven or disproven. To me it is inevitable that some people embark on a journey of mastery only to discover that there is some kind of barrier that they can't overcome just by thinking or working their way out of it. Plenty of clear-cut examples, lot's of more murky ones. Some barriers are predictable, some aren't. And mastery doesn't even equal success. Many master painters had no success in their life time. Many successful artists have questionably mastery.

keyle 6y ago

The medieval explanation was far more revealing than the pyramid that came after. I highly recommend "everydays" as a way to mastery. I've done in arts and music and I'm still mind blown at how fast and proficient I got. The rules are simple: do one thing every day, that you can be held accountable (aka. in public). Such as a daily jam on twitch or soundcloud, a piece on IG. Keep it up, after 2-3 days you get much faster, after 10 days you do it flyingly, after 30 days I find the curve flattens a bit as you're pretty much as proficient as could be. Time to then start another goal as "everyday". If you miss one day, don't sweat it. Pretend that day didn't happen.

tajd 6y ago
I really like that idea. I use it a lot in my own work. For example, working through the sample sheets for an MIT opencourseware or working on learning a Data Science problem. Focus on how you construct your habits to learn more.
- keyle 6y ago
  yeah and because you "ship" something everyday, your pipeline gets put in place. You'll have no blockers, you can then spend more time on better results, the pipeline is ready to go for the shipping part, whatever that may be. Some of my everyday pieces got so good they started rivalling with my quality work I spent days on.
dgb23 6y ago
I agree with your first sentiment especially. I’m fascinated by the master apprentice relationship in craftsmanship and other things like meditation practice (zen). It is a really powerful and - excuse this wishy washy term - natural principle. But I think it is not as prevalent as it should be when it comes to programming and software development, which is a beautiful mix of problem solving, craft/skill, and the arts of communication and organization. It is driven by experience/practice and pragmatism but also creativity and synthesis. This paradox yearns for mentorship. Gladly we have some excellent thinkers and communicators in our culture and history. And the internet. But I feel as an industry we don’t do as much as we should to further our craftsmanship.

idoby 6y ago

There's a certain truth to be considered that there are some things you will never be able to master, not even after 20000 hours. Usually people identify these things early on in life, but sometimes it takes a while. For example, I realized early on that I would never be able to become a fighter pilot.

dsabanin 6y ago
I found myself actually being able to do things I thought early on I could never become good at, and pretty well. If anything, now I treat that unpleasant feeling of perceived impossibility of something as a strong indication that I should pursue it. It never let me down. I think pretty much the only thing that disqualifies you from becoming a fighter jet pilot is an untreatable bodily impediment. Well, also pacifism, but that’s chosen :)
- idoby 6y ago
  It might become treatable soon, but I'll be too old anyway. Good thing being a pilot was never a dream of mine :)